asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how much profit has been made by the Government on the transactions of the British Australian Wool Realisation Association up to date; how much wool remains to be disposed of; and when the operations of the British Australian Wool Realisation Association will cease?

I have been asked to answer this question. The British Australian Wool Realisation Association, Ltd., was formed to realise to the best advantage the wool remaining on the hands of the Government on 31st December, 1920, which belonged partly to the Australian Wool Growers and partly to the British Government. The British Australian Wool Realisation Association, Ltd., was merely a realisation company and was not formed for profit making, but to date it has paid over to the British Government £27,831,144 as the nett proceeds of the wool realised on their account. With regard to the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Southwark Central on 18th February last.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the approximate area and population of the Jubaland territory which it is proposed to hand over to Italy; and whether the native population has been consulted, or will be consulted, as to whether it has any wishes in the matter?

The area of that part of Jubaland which it is proposed to cede to Italy is about 33,000 square miles; the population may be estimated, with great reserve, at 12,000. No condition as to the consent of the inhabitants was made in the Treaty of London, and I do not see how the fulfilment of the Treaty can be made subject to such consent.

Surely this is a departure from the principle of self-determination.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman takes up a great deal of time by trying to make a little speech on each of his questions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his Majesty's Government promised the Government of Italy in 1916 that, in the event of His Majesty's Government getting certain German colonies, they would take steps to cede to Italy certain territories described as Jubaland; whether this promise was definite or conditional; and what steps they propose to take to carry out this promise?

No, Sir, the undertaking entered into under Article 13 of the Treaty of London was that in the event of Great Britain increasing her Colonial territory in Africa at the expense of Germany, His Majesty's Government would agree in principle that Italy might claim some equitable compensation, particularly as regards the settlement in her favour of the questions relative to the frontiers of the Italian Colonies of Eritrea, Somaliland and Libya. The Italian Government eventually demanded, as part of this frontier rectification, the cession of a territory three times the size of Belgium. When His Majesty's Government consented to this enlarged transaction they attached the condition that the cession could only become effective as part of the general settlement of all the issues raised, at the Peace Conference. This condition, accepted by the Italian Government at the time, is now said by them to be no longer applicable to present circumstances. Were Italy merely demanding the execution of the undertaking given in the Treaty of London, my predecessors would, I feel sure, have regarded it as an obligation of honour immediately to liquidate that promise; it was merely because Italy asked for something far more extensive than the ratification foreshadowed in the Treaty of London that the transaction was regarded as part of a general settlement. The above explanation is, I think, necessary in order to remove the misapprehensions which have arisen on this question and to indicate the aspect, from which my predecessors in office have approached the matter. I hope that certain conversations that have taken place since I last answered a question on this subject may lead to a re-opening of the whole matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether two directors of one Suva firm have been appointed to the two unofficial seats on the Executive Council of Fiji; whether he has ratified these appointments; and whether any rules for the guidance of Colonial Governors in advising such appointments are issued from his Department?

I am informed that the two elected members of the Legislative Council of Fiji, whose appointment to the Executive Council was announced in the "London Gazette" of 4th December, are directors of firms which have been amalgamated. As there are only seven elected members, such arrangements, though generally undesirable, are sometimes unavoidable. The reply to the last part of the question is in the negative.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will arrange for the publication of all hitherto unpublished treaties or agreements with other countries?

All the treaties and other agreements with foreign countries by which His Majesty's Government are at the present time bound have been laid before Parliament in the Treaty Series or published in "British and Foreign State Papers," with the exception of a few arrangements made necessary by war-time conditions which may now be considered to have lapsed. I am having a report for my own information on these. His Majesty's Government now communicate all treaty engagements, on conclusion, to the League of Nations, which publishes them in its own Treaty Series. There are copies of this in the Library of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any conditions are attached to the granting of the loan to Hungary, under the auspices of the League of Nations, with regard to the carrying out of the Clauses of the Treaty of Trianon affecting racial and religious minorities?

In accepting Protocol 1 of the League of Nations scheme, the Hungarian Government under takes, in accordance with the stipulations of the Treaty of Trianon, strictly and loyally to fulfil the obligations contained in the said treaty.

Before the next question is asked, Mr. Speaker, may I ask whether you said, when you made your statement the other day, that we were to be rationed to two questions? [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"]

I said that I would take the sense of the House by the means available to me. I have not yet completed my inquiries.

:

17. To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the seizure on Friday last of 186 barrels and cases of liquor on board of the s.s. "Adriatic" by agents of the Treasury in the United States of America; whether this seizure is in accordance with the Treaty recently signed; whether he is aware that British ships have observed the American law in the letter and spirit, and that ships of other nationalities, such as France and Italy, have not been molested in spite of the fact that the customary alcoholic beverages are supplied as required; and whether he will make representations with regard to this apparent discrimination against a British ship?

I have been asked to postpone this question. May I inquire whether the Government will press on with the ratification of the Treaty with America?

The matter is being pressed on.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the Sudan Government is now withdrawing temporary allowances made to its pensioners calculated to meet the increased cost of living; and whether, in view of the fact that the index figure in this country, so far from diminishing, has increased, he will make representations on the subject to the Sudan Government?

I have no information on this subject, but will cause inquiries to be made.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is now prepared to arrange for the abolition of visas between this country and Czechslovakia?

His Majesty's Government have not considered that the time has arrived for the conclusion of the arrangement suggested.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that firms having business interests in Czech-slovakia are very severely handicapped by this?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, at the approaching conference with plenipotentiaries of the Russian Soviet Government, the various firms representing different trades and interests whose properties have been confiscated by Soviet legislation will be represented?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he proposes to take advantage of the knowledge and skill possessed by British companies and firms formerly operating in various capacities in Russia by inviting their advice upon the different trades and industry formerly operated by them; and, if so, how is this advice to be tendered?

I would refer the hon. Members to the answer given by the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the hon. Member for Coventry on the 27th February. Private bodies which are interested in or have experience of Russia should communicate to the Foreign Office any expression of their views which they may wish to put forward.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it will not only help this country but also Russia if commercial confidence is re-established?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether, in the negotiations for the settlement of British claims with the plenipotentiaries of the Russian Soviet Government, he will give instructions to British representatives to insist upon the restitution of industrial properties to their rightful owners wherever the possibility of restitution exists or, in the event of full restitution not being possible, if he will see that adequate and effective compensation is secured in respect of nationalized or confiscated properties?

I have already announced repeatedly that one of the subjects for negotiation is the claims of British nationals, and these will be examined in detail as the general principle has already been admitted.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, in the negotiations, he proposes to insist upon the principle followed by successive Governments, that where property has been confiscated there should either be restitution of or effective compensation?

I am not going to commit myself on any point. The whole question is to be discussed, and I have, I think, said enough to show by what we are going to stand, as far as possible, in order to get agreement on the position indicated in the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that seven British-born subjects who were sentenced to five years' imprisonment in the United States of America for violation of the Espionage Act are now to be deported on completion of their sentences; and whether, in view of the fact that the law under which these men are to be deported was passed subsequent to their trial and conviction and that they have already suffered punishment for their offence, he can make any representations as to the withdrawal of the deportation order?

The answer to the first part of the question is that reports to this effect have been received concerning five British subjects. As regards the second part of the question, I have no information as to whether the law, under which the deportation of these men has been ordered, was passed subsequently to their trial and conviction or not. But the matter is not one in which His Majesty's Government can properly intervene.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will reverse the policy of previous Governments by drafting any new legislation in language which will be intelligible to the ordinary citizen?

Any want of intelligibility in language in Bills in the past has been due to the complexity and intractibility of the subject dealt with more than to any policy on the part of Governments. I should be glad if intelligibility to the ordinary citizen were more consonant with legal intricacies.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can see his way to bring in an amending Bill to the Trade Disputes Act to regulate peaceful picketing in cases where either mails or perishable food is being held up to the prejudice of the people?

I have been asked to reply. I would refer the hon. Member to the answers which I gave on Thursday last to questions on this subject by the hon. and gallant Members for Dulwich and Bromley.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that Members of Parliament are subjected to what is now known as the postcard nuisance, and that many of these missives peremptorily demand answers to support their point of view, and contain veiled threats if the recipient ignores them or takes a contrary view; and if he proposes taking any action to put a stop to this practice, which causes expense, annoyance, and undue pressure to be brought to bear on Members?

The postcard nuisance is an infliction of long standing. Ex hypothesi, a Member of Parliament is a man with backbone who can stand much pressure without yielding.

Would the Prime Minister like to see samples of a few of these postcards?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to introduce legislation to give effect to the recommendations as to betterment contained in Section 3 of the Second Report of the Acquisition and Valuation of Land Committee, so that the cost of public improvements may be reduced by securing to those who carry them out a sufficient proportion of the resulting increase in the value of land to prevent loss on the cost of construction?

I have been asked to reply. I will have the matter considered, but it is impossible at present to promise the introduction of legislation.

asked the Prime Minister what steps, if any, have yet been taken towards the construction of a rail way traffic and goods tunnel from Gravesend to Tilbury; and whether his advisers have considered its utility in relation to the present congested state of London traffic?

I have been asked to reply. As I explained on the 28th February, in answer to the hon. and gallant Member for the Hertford Division, instructions have been given to an eminent engineer for the preparation of plans and reports upon the suggested road tunnel between Gravesend and Tilbury, for the consideration of my Department. The construction of a railway tunnel is a matter primarily for the consideration of the railway companies concerned, and I am inquiring into the matter.

asked the Prime Minister whether, inasmuch as provisions of the Local Authorities (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1923, expire on 1st April next, he proposes to introduce any further legislation?

I have been asked to reply. A Bill to extend the duration of the Local Authorities (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1923, was introduced last Friday.

Do the Government at any stage of the Bill propose to bring forward any suggestions whereby the funds contributed by the boards of guardians to feed and maintain inmates shall be further and more adequately secured?

The Bill has been printed.

That question must be put down.

asked the Prime Minister whether he proposes to introduce legislation making provision for some collateral security which would protect ratepayers against illegal payments by boards of guardians in addition to the ordinary power of surcharge?

I have been asked to reply. The Government will welcome any suggestions on this subject, but as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister indicated in the course of the Debate last Tuesday, probably the most effective security would be found in a reform of the present Poor Law system which, as the hon. Member knows, the Government propose to take in hand.

Have the Government devised any proposals to meet this point?

I did not say that, but we should welcome assistance from the hon. Member.

When considering this matter, will the Government consider getting collateral security against other public bodies, such as the London County Council, who have on two occasions been taken into court and surcharged and who have had the surcharges remitted?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government are prepared to carry out the recommendations of the Committee on National Expenditure of 1918 when setting up the Estimates Committee this Session?

I have again looked into this matter, but I see no grounds for modifying the view expressed in my answer to the hon. Member for York on the 20th February. The terms of reference proposed are those agreed after a conference attended by Mr. Speaker and representatives of all parties in 1921, and the Government see no reason for altering them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not prepared to carry out the recommendation that some member of the Public Accounts Committee should sit on the Estimates Committee?

My right hon. Friend must put down a specific question.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is proposed to set up a Select Committee to deal with the position and grievances of the ex-ranker officers; and, if so, when he hopes to be in a position to announce the names of the members of this Select Committee and the terms of reference?

asked the Prime Minister whether he has now come to a conclusion in respect of the claims of ex-Army ranker officers in regard to their assessment for pensions on the basis of non-commissioned rank?

asked the Prime Minister if he can state the composition of the Committee which proposes to inquire into the case of the ex-Army ranker officers; and whether he can state the scope and procedure of the inquiry?

I have gone through the papers of this case, and, after consultation with the Secretary of State for War, am of opinion that they might be sent to a Select Committee. The terms of reference I propose will be

"to consider the claims that have been made by ex-ranker officers, and to report."

If agreement is signified through the usual channels, immediate steps will be taken to constitute the Committee.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that an Amendment on this subject is down for Debate on the Army Estimates, and in view of the fact that he has pledged himself and his party to remedy this grievance in the immediate future, will he take that appropriate opportunity to leave this matter to a free vote of this House?

What I propose to do I have explained in the answer to the question. It is apparent that the question is not clear as to what the grievances were. I have gone through all the papers. But I should like the House to take upon itself the responsibility of settling this matter. We are not in a majority here, and, therefore, we think it appropriate for the whole House to take the responsibility of settling the question. In those conditions no Whips will be put on.

Is it a fact that in the Debate on the Army Estimates the House will have an opportunity of deciding for itself?

What is the use of a Select Committee, when the majority of Members of this House are already pledged?

I should hope that the report would be available before the Army Estimates are discussed.

Before a fortnight?

Surely. There is very little to be settled. The Committee can do its work at once. It is perfectly simple.

Suppose that agreement be not secured through the usual channels, what steps does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take in the matter?

That is a hypothetical question.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has now considered the Report of the Anderson Committee with reference to the pay of the three fighting services; and whether he can now announce the decision of the Government upon the subject?

The matter is under consideration; I am unable to state when a decision is likely to be taken.

May we hope that the decision will not be too long delayed, as the future of a great many men is entirely dependent on it?

Will the House have an opportunity of discussing any changes that are proposed by the Cabinet as a result of the Anderson Committee Report?

The changes, if any, will appear in the ordinary Votes, and in relation to that the question will be submitted.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the negotiations between the Government and the Commercial Airship Company were almost completed when he took office; and whether, in view of the delays that have already taken place, he can give an assurance that a decision will be given upon this matter without further delay?

Yes, Sir. I am aware that the negotiations referred to had reached an advanced stage when the present Government took office. The stage reached, however, was not so far advanced that His Majesty's Government would be justified in presenting the scheme to Parliament unless they were satisfied regarding its provisions. For that purpose, the scheme is now being examined.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has set up, or is proposing to set up, a special Committee to deal with League of Nations work; what is the composition of this Committee; what are its exact duties; and whether the staff dealing with League of Nations work is wholly drawn from and located in the Foreign Office?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. There is no occasion for setting up a special committee. The work is effectively done in, or co-ordinated by, the Foreign Office under my personal direction, with the assistance of the Lord President of the Council, who represents His Majesty's Government in the League. The members of the staff with one exception belong to the Foreign Office.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government still adhere, as being necessary for the full resumption of international trade, to the six fundamental conditions stated in the first resolution adopted by the Supreme Council at Cannes in January, 1922, as the basis of the Genoa Conference?

Substantially that is so.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the labours of the Select Committee on the Nationality of Married Women and of the amount of valuable evidence taken, he can allow an opportunity either for the introduction of legislation or for the setting up of a further Committee to consider the matter during this Session?

In view of the fact that the Committee referred to failed to arrive at a conclusion, and that the Imperial Conference of last autumn, who had the Committee's Report before them, came to the conclusion that no case was made out for any general change of the law on this subject, there seems to be no advantage in initiating further enquiry at the moment, and no posibility of legislation other than that recommended by the Conference for the purpose of dealing with certain hard cases.

Is the Prime Minister aware that all the Members of the House of Commons who were on this Committee were unanimous that legislation was important?

If I were convinced that anything could be done, I would be perfectly willing to try to do it. I look at this question not from the point of view of what I would like to do, but from the point of view of what I might find myself limited in doing.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will give an undertaking that no free railway pusses will be issued to Members of Parliament without first asking the sanction of the House for this new policy?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Prime Minister whether, following the Report of the Wireless Committee, whatever decision may be come to by the Government he will give an assurance to the House that the Empire Wireless Chain may be put into operation with the shortest possible delay?

It is precisely in order that the Empire Wireless Chain may be put into operation with the least possible delay that the Government have acted as they have done. An early opportunity will be taken of placing before the House the action which it is proposed to take on the Report of the Committee.

Following the commendably prompt Report of Mr. Donald's Committee, seeing that this subject has been under consideration for twelve years, can the right hon. Gentleman—

The hon. Member had better put that question on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many members of the subordinate staff of the Kingston Penitentiary, Jamaica, are without official quarters; and whether, in such cases, he can grant concessions similar to those granted to the police of Jamaica?

As regards the first part of the question, it will be necessary to consult the Governor of Jamaica, who is being asked to supply the desired particulars; as regards the second part, the hon. Member will appreciate that the matter is one for the local Legislature, but the suggestion shall be put before the Governor.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) whether, in view of the anticipated shortage of accommodation for visitors in London during the time of the British Empire Exhibition at Wembley, the Government is taking any steps to prevent inconvenience to the public owing to lack of accommodation;

(2) whether he will consider the desirability of the British Government arranging with the Dominion Governments for the provision of suitable passenger ships to be moored in the Thames in order to supplement available accommodation for visitors to the British Empire Exhibition?

I will answer these two questions together. I have given very careful consideration, to the important subject referred to by the hon. Member, and have stated in reply to previous questions the steps which have been taken in the matter by the authorities of the British Empire Exhibition. I doubt if the Government can usefully take further action in the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn by the Imperial Merchant Service Guild to recent piratical attacks on British ships trading in Chinese waters; whether he is aware that the lack of precautions against such attacks has aroused much adverse comment amongst British subjects engaged in trade in China; whether the circumstances of the latest case, that of the British registered vessel "Hydrangea," have been laid before him; if so, what, if any, steps are being taken in dealing with this serious menace to life and property; whether the British authorities at Hong Kong are moving in the matter; and whether the Colonial Office will ensure that such British registered vessels shall be provided with wireless apparatus which might at any time prove a valuable safeguard in cases of this kind when lives and property are in jeopardy?

The Governor of Hong Kong drew the attention of my predecessor to the case of the "Hydrangea," on which I am asking for a detailed report with recommendations. A Commission appointed in 1922 reported that piracy can never be effectually prevented until public order is firmly established in the neighbouring Chinese territories. This Commission did not advise that wireless apparatus should be made compulsory by the Piracy Regulations, either upon river steamers or (with one dissentient) upon ocean steamers.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonics whether any of the Dominions who agreed at the recent Economic. Conference to form an economic committee to consider and advise upon matters of an economic and commercial character which these Governments may agree to refer to it have suggested to him the abandonment of the committtee; and, if not, why he proposes to abandon the formation of the committee?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part, I would refer the right hon. Member to the answers which I gave to the hon. Member for Dumfries (Dr. Chapple) on 25th February. I do not think that I can at present usefully add anything to those answers.

In view of the fact that none of the Dominion Governments who consented to this proposal have since indicated that they are opposed to it, will the right hon. Gentleman communicate with those Governments before deciding what recommendation he will make to the House?

As I have already intimated, an opportunity will be given to the House of discussing the whole question, and any arguments bearing upon the case can then be considered.

I am sorry to press the right hon. Gentleman, but this is a very important matter. Will the right hon. Gentleman obtain from those Dominion Governments who agreed to this proposal, and one of whom actually made the proposal, a statement as to whether they wish to continue it before we discuss the matter in this House?

The Government have given effect to the promise that all matters affecting the Dominions will be communicated to the Dominions before they are communicated to this House. It was done in this particular case, and obviously it would be for them to communicate with us.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether after 1st April, 1924, Northern Rhodesia will have the status of a colony or of a protectorate; whether its constitution has yet been decided, and what will take the place of the present Advisory Council; and whether Northern Rhodesia will be part of the South African Customs Union?

It is not proposed to annex the territory of Northern Rhodesia, at any rate for the present, and its status will, therefore, continue to be that of a Protectorate. Instruments providing for the government of the territory from the 1st April next will be published shortly. It is proposed to set up a legislative Council in which there will be an official majority and an unofficial elected element, but the details of the electoral machinery are reserved for consideration after the change in administration has taken place, and will form the subject of local legislation. The unofficial element will, therefore, in the first instance be nominated. I have received no intimation that the Government of the Union of South Africa have given notice of withdrawal from the existing Customs agreement with Northern Rhodesia, which will continue to regulate the Customs relations between the Union and Northern Rhodesia, unless and until it is amended or superseded.

With reference to the publication of this new Order in Council or whatever it is, do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that it will be circulated as a White Paper?

Yes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies on what date were the Dominions informed that the question of the precedence of Dominion High Commissioner in Great Britain had been settled; and who was the Secretary of State who settled it?

As indicated in Section XIII of the "Summary of Proceedings," the question of the precedence of the High Commissioners was amongst those discussed at the Imperial Conference last autumn. After the Conference ended, my predecessor took up the matter, and, just before leaving office, made to the Dominion Prime Ministers proposals which were designed to place it on a satisfactory footing. I am now waiting to learn whether these proposals are generally acceptable, and in the meantime am not in a position to make any definite statement.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is going to carry out his pre decessor's proposals?

Yes, certainly.